§ Commander NobleI beg leave to present a Petition, signed by 23,000 persons, who are either stockholders, employees or users of British railways. Your Petitioners believe that the Transport Bill will deprive them of their property without just compensation and will discourage enterprise in the industry. They therefore ask for a full public inquiry before any change is made in the ownership of British railways. The Petition concludes with a Prayer that the Transport Bill may not be passed into law.
§ Petition to lie upon the Table.
652Mr. VaneI beg leave to present a Petition objecting to the Transport Bill, signed by 23,000 persons, who depend on road transport for their supplies of goods and passenger services. They say they believe that the proposed State monopoly will be less efficient and more costly than the present transport system and ask for a public inquiry into it before the new proposals become law. The Petition ends with the following Prayer:
Wherefore your Petitioners humbly pray that the Transport Bill may not be allowed to pass into law.I beg leave to present a further Petition, signed by 164,000 persons, engaged in or using road transport, asking that proposals for the nationalisation of the industry may not pass into law. The Petitioners say they fear that under Government-owned transport services many of them will lose their means of livelihood and that the result will be harmful to the trade and industry of the nation. The Petition concludes with the following words:We, your Petitioners, humbly pray your honourable House to reject any proposals which may hereafter be submitted to Parliament for the approval of legislation with the object of replacing private enterprise in the provision of road transport by a nationalised or Government-controlled system of transport, and your Petitioners, as in duty bound, will ever pray.Petitions to lie upon the Table.
§ Mr. BowlesOn a point of Order, Mr. Speaker. Am I right or wrong in assuming that the Procedure lays down that in the event of your coming to the conclusion that any Petitions presented to this Honourable House are frivolous you have the right to kick them out?
§ Mr. SpeakerThese Petitions have all been to the Public Bill Office and have been passed. I should be very sorry to abolish what is an ancient right. One may or may not agree with the subject of a Petition, but it is something which every hon. Member has the right, on behalf of his constituents, to present to the House of Commons, and I cherish these traditions.
§ Mr. BowlesMay I make it quite clear that I was not complaining at all about the presentation of these or any other Petitions. [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."] I have not said anything to indicate I was. All I was asking was whether or not, in the event of your coming to the con- 653 elusion that any Petition was frivolous, you had the right yourself to kick it out.
§ Mr. SpeakerThe hon. Gentleman must not think that I am going to examine every Petition presented before the House. I have an Office which deals with that. If they pass it according to the Rules of the House, I do not presume to say that it is ridiculous or anything of that sort. I really must trust to the good faith of the hon. Member who presents it.
§ Mr. MikardoFurther to that point of Order, Mr. Speaker. Without in any way querying your Ruling, which was welcomed by hon. Members in all parts of the House, may I ask if it is not a fact that in the case of these Petitions with regard to the Transport Bill there are recorded instances that women signed them in the mistaken belief, of which the sponsors did not disabuse them, that they were petitioning for the return of soldiers from the Far East?
§ Mr. SpeakerI am not aware of that